Rail Deck Park (?, ?, ?)

[MisterF]

Central Park wasn't central to the city either when it was created; not even close to it.

Compared to Rouge Park, yes it was.

 

[TransitBart]

It will be interesting to see if this repurposing of this land changes the planning criteria for further development. The wall of towers on the south side was acceptable when the land was being used for trains. but it wouldn't pass a shadow study. It will be a challenge to preserve sunlight. This tract is much narrower than say Central Parkp or Grant Park, and the wall-of-buildings border will need careful management.

- Paul

*newbie alert* *neophyte* *green*

1. What on earth is there to manage after the buildings are already there?
2. If we want a park - sounds like a good idea - why is our first instinct to create obstacles to getting it done?

"If all obstacles must first be overcome, then nothing will ever be achieved."

 

[crs1026]

*newbie alert* *neophyte* *green*

1. What on earth is there to manage after the buildings are already there?
2. If we want a park - sounds like a good idea - why is our first instinct to create obstacles to getting it done?

"If all obstacles must first be overcome, then nothing will ever be achieved."

1. Nothing has to be removed. The question is how to design it to make the best out of what's there. Which may include not filling in any of the remaining gaps that lets the sun reach the spot.

2. Sure, let's just rush ahead blindly with our unbridled enthusiasm and see how it turns out. Now who's the newbie?

There is a difference between naysaying and looking realistically at the physical constraints and pointing out challenges to address. This is a very long narrow tract of land with tall borders. Some areas are sunlight challenged. How do we prevent a claustrophobic canyon effect? Some areas will need to be designed with respect for the large pedestrian traffic eg from Skydome. Other challenges will be discovered, I'm sure. I'm just putting a few on the list so they can be thought out.

- Paul

 

[rbt]

Compared to Rouge Park, yes it was.

The equivalent location for creating a Central Park today might be closer to New Market (unoccupied land at the edge of our growth area). CP was central to the island, not central to the city; it was in-fact, something like 1 km from any existing city street when the land was set-aside.

The NY museum (124th?) goes over the process of establishing the park in some detail.

Downsview Park in 100 years will also be very central to the city.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

1. Nothing has to be removed. The question is how to design it to make the best out of what's there. Which may include not filling in any of the remaining gaps that lets the sun reach the spot.

2. Sure, let's just rush ahead blindly with our unbridled enthusiasm and see how it turns out. Now who's the newbie?

There is a difference between naysaying and looking realistically at the physical constraints and pointing out challenges to address. This is a very long narrow tract of land with tall borders. Some areas are sunlight challenged. How do we prevent a claustrophobic canyon effect? Some areas will need to be designed with respect for the large pedestrian traffic eg from Skydome. Other challenges will be discovered, I'm sure. I'm just putting a few on the list so they can be thought out.

- Paul

The section between Blue Jays Way and Bathurst is "easy" - it is fairly wide and the buildings on either side aren't all that tall (far exceed the width:height 1:1 ratio). The more problematical section is probably between Blue Jays Way and Simcoe - but given how the north side will be redeveloped, the issues will likely be ameliorated (re: Oxford proposal). Of more concern IMO is the south side of that section - neither CN Tower nor Ripley designed that section of the facade to deal with a major public space. On the bright side, the solution will resolve what is a super awkward urban design arrangement.

As to large pedestrian traffic - having a large public space will additional multiple passthroughs will likely ease pedestrian traffic - the current arrangement is hardly ideal.

AoD

 

[MisterF]

The equivalent location for creating a Central Park today might be closer to New Market (unoccupied land at the edge of our growth area). CP was central to the island, not central to the city; it was in-fact, something like half a km from any existing city street when the land was set-aside.

The NY museum (124th?) goes over the process of establishing the park in some detail.

Downsview Park in 100 years will also be very central to the city.

Central Park is 6 km from Lower Manhattan and right next to Midtown. Rouge Park is 24 km from downtown Toronto in the middle of car oriented sprawl. That's a huge difference in context. I can't see any situation where northeast Scarborough/Pickering will ever be considered central, let alone surpass downtown the way Midtown has in New York. The area around High Park maybe, if Toronto ever gets to New York's size. But not Rouge Park.

Besides, this discussion came up because of the density and lack of parkland downtown. Rouge Park does nothing to fix that. Even Central Park doesn't help the parkland situation on Wall Street.

 

[W. K. Lis]

When John Howard deeded High Park in 1873, it wasn't even in the City of Toronto. Parkdale and Brockton separated the park from the city itself.

 

[mrgrieves]

I would love to see this park get built, but its gonna be very narrow (150m or so at its widest point?)....a baseball player with a good arm can probably throw a ball across the width of it. Central Park seems like a poor comparison.

I would imagine it will be more of a wide promenade.

Also, why the automatic comparison with NYC? Montreal also has a park designed by Olmsted (Mount Royal!) while Toronto was still a backwater

 

[mdrejhon]

Walking the length of New York Central Park literally takes about an hour from end to end -- in real life. Even straight-line along the edge, it's 4.1km, still takes half hour for a New York speed brisk walk.

That's a heck of a walk from Front Street to north of Dupont Street (3.7km from Union). Ever walked Central Park, like I have? Imagine walking from Union Station to Summerhill Station (4.1km) -- that's almost Front St to St. Clair! (4.8km)

None of our downtown parks will ever hold a candle to that total size/length! And Central Park is still smaller than Mont Royal in area, albiet not flush to a skyscraper wall that Central Park is.

The Rail Deck park, will still be ginormously gigantic by "Downtown Toronto" standards.

To Central Park comparison credit, the Rail Deck Park will kind of feel like a "mini Central Park" because it will have a "skyscraper wall" on both sides (by then, at least). Height of skyscraper wall is subject to debate due to shadows -- but you can bank on a skyscraper wall of some kind forming -- on the less developed northern side of the Rail Deck Park -- to complement the mostly-pre-existing CityPlace skyscraper wall on the southern side.

 

[Translude15]

Considering the Oxford redevelopment of the MTCC may be on the table once again, here's hoping the proposed rail deck park would extend further east towards the CN Tower/Ripley's. Doing so would probably allow for a complete revitalization of the Rogers Centre promenade facing the railway tracks. Perhaps some sort of centre field fan area would be permissible with the rail deck park. Walking along the northern edge of the Dome can be an absolute nightmare with large crowds, especially this season.

 

[Northern Light]

Can I play the 'some of ours' is bigger than 'some of theirs' game too?

LOL

Its kind of silly, but if we must...........the Leslie Street Spit, aka. Tommy Thompson Park
is significantly larger than Central Park.

CP is approx. 843 acres; The spit is 1,250.

That doesn't include the adjacent North Shore Park/Cherry Beach lands.

Its also centrally located.

Just saying.

But, honestly, comparisons like this get a bit tiresome. (my fact-check notwithstanding)

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Considering the Oxford redevelopment of the MTCC may be on the table once again, here's hoping the proposed rail deck park would extend further east towards the CN Tower/Ripley's. Doing so would probably allow for a complete revitalization of the Rogers Centre promenade facing the railway tracks. Perhaps some sort of centre field fan area would be permissible with the rail deck park. Walking along the northern edge of the Dome can be an absolute nightmare with large crowds, especially this season.

Honestly I think the Oxford stretch is more critical in the short run given how badly the area is knitted together.

AoD

 

[mdrejhon]

Can I play the 'some of ours' is bigger than 'some of theirs' game too?

It's centrally located, and a true gem, but it can't quite be accessed in mere minutes from all over downtown Toronto via multiple modes. Central Park can quickly be accessed by subway, NYC Taxi, Citibike bikeshare, own bike, Uber, walking, etc.

Free and paid modes of transportation. Rail Deck Park will be. Maybe when they build an underground tunnel to the Islands, but not yet. The Islands feels more of an excursion, given the mandatory paid ferry hop that on a busy day feels like the least-favourite part of the trip (at least the pre-boarding!).

Central Park is accessible enough by a huge number of transport modes, that most of Manhattan can reach it for lunch & be back to work on time, if one had a full lunch hour (transit time + relax time) if one wished to spontaneously avail themselves to the Park (example only of centralness). To me, such feeling of central ease and quickness of accessibility all the way out to medium-density areas outside of the skyscraper core, that's the definition of a capital-C "Centrally Located" park, not most of the token "centrally located" parks this thread speaks of.

Certainly, Toronto's heavily-densified boundaries aren't as clearly defined as Manhattan, so for the purposes of park access ease, I'll go with "Downtown Toronto"

Honestly I think the Oxford stretch is more critical in the short run given how badly the area is knitted together.

Assuming GO RER considerations/electrification is solved rather quickly, I think that's the Rail Deck priority area, too.

Seeing it extend all the way from east edge of MTCC all the way to Bathurst would be a 1.4 kilometer rail deck project, though. Almost three CN tower heights long. That's one mondoo expensive rail deck!

 

[kotsy]

I can't believe there are still discussions comparing this to Central Park. It's nothing like Central Park in terms of size, what's inside ( 4 lakes and a zoo for a start) and it's location (mid-town). However, it's everything like Millennium Park for size, location (heart of downtown) and the fact that it's being built over rail lines. I wouldn't even really compare this to Hudson Yards because they will look radically different when finished.

Now, can we all move on to some other topic like this is not getting built fast enough

 

[salsa]

Can I play the 'some of ours' is bigger than 'some of theirs' game too?

Its kind of silly, but if we must...........the Leslie Street Spit, aka. Tommy Thompson Park
is significantly larger than Central Park.

These silly comparisons like to pretend that size is everything. But Central Park is far more interesting to visit than what is basically a garbage dump with some overgrown vegetation that happens to survive somehow. New York has nothing to be jealous about here.

Its also centrally located.

And yet inaccessible by transit.